Posted on 06/03/2006 9:56:08 AM PDT by rface
DES MOINES, Iowa - A judge has ruled that a Bible-based prison program violates the First Amendment's freedom of religion clause by using state funds to promote Christianity to inmates.
Prison Fellowship Ministries, which was sued in 2003 by an advocacy group, was ordered Friday to cease its program at the Newton Correctional Facility and repay the state $1.53 million.
"This calls into question the funding for so many programs," said Barry Lynn, executive director of the Washington-based Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which filed the suit. "Anyone who doesn't stop it is putting a giant 'sue me' sign on top of their building."
Lynn's group accused Prison Fellowship Ministries of giving preferential treatment to inmates participating in the program. They were given special visitation rights, movie-watching privileges, access to computers and access to classes needed for early parole.
U.S. District Judge Robert Pratt called the perks "seemingly minor benefits" that constituted unfair treatment to those not in the religious program. Despite any claims of rehabilitating inmates, the program "impermissibly endorses religion," Pratt wrote.
The InnerChange Freedom Initiative was implemented in Newton in 1999. State prison officials have said they hired the religious group to improve inmate behavior and reduce recidivism — not promote Christianity.
Ministry president Mark Earley said in a statement Friday that the group plans to appeal the ruling and believes its program is constitutional.
"This decision, if allowed to stand, will enshrine religious discrimination," Earley said. "It has attacked the right of people of faith to operate on a level playing field in the public arena and to provide services to those who volunteered to receive them."
The judge gave the group's workers 60 days to leave the prison, though he put a stay on his order, meaning the decision won't officially be implemented until the appeals process is complete.
___
On the Net:
Prison Fellowship Ministries: http://www.pfm.org
Americans United for Separation of Church and State:
I'll try to do a search
"Korans Are Us" ?????
There's an easy answer: don't fund it using state taxes. Ask local churches to put up the monies.
Earley emphasized that the program is very successful. Among those who finish the entire 18 month Innerchange pre-release program, eight percent of those who graduate return to prison versus the 50 percent who return to prison overall, he said.
http://www.christianpost.com/php_functions/print_friendly.php?tbl_name=society&id=2050
I'm guessing the 1.5 million is accounting trickery, not actual expenditures.
of course, there will still be many who will try to keep even church money from being allowed. I would bet that Rev. Barry Lynn would be looking for a way to keep Christians from preaching in prison....even with private money.
BTW - Some Prison Chaplians are paid by the state.....(I think)
If the state has an interest in reducing recidivism, and Prison Fellowship Ministries helps with that, where's the conflict?
We must wipe this nation clean of all mention of Christ and Christianity.
Pratt is a Clinton appointee and an outspoken opponent of mandatory minimum sentences.
They do not see inner change postive, even if it means reduced recidivism, if it also means devotion to Christ. Christianity is their enemy.
You should know by this time that Barry Lynn's concern is not about the State funding a Christian program, his problem is with anything Christian.
Why else did he sue Prison Fellowship Ministries, and not the State? These articles read as if it is PFM that is running the prison.
The judge seems to think that PFM forced the state to pay for the program.
I'll bet this suit was filed in Iowa specifically to get it heard by Judge Pratt, because Lynn knew he would get the ruling he wanted from Pratt. This will go all the way to the Supreme Court.
I don't recall the details of this case, but there are constitutional abuses in some religious jail programs, forcing inmates into programs which require them to profess the same faith as those who run the program. Lynn is often wrong, but could be in the right here.
He's a clinton appointee, naturally.
http://www.iasd.uscourts.gov/iasd/courtinfo.nsf/d728451ef4f99375862566890056d00b/11d0094d0e32abd4862566890058b69d?OpenDocument
Also, he has put himself on record as favoring the legalization of drugs.
http://www.november.org/dissentingopinions/Pratt.html
Where do we get these judges?
I see that the issue of Muslim clerical prosetylizing(sp) has already been addressed. My bf has a long time friend who is studying for prison ministry. I will show him this when he comes home. He may want to email our friend and show him this.
As for the article, I find it disgusting that anyone would object to a program that yields positive results among the prison population. Maybe that's what they really object to...
The conflict exists between the establishment of a de facto religion by the state of Iowa and the federal Constitution prohibition on religious establishments.
Would it matter if Prison Fellowship Ministries was reducing recidivism while promulgating Branch Davidian, Heaven's Gate or other cultic doctrines? What about tax supported Buddhist or Islamic ministries?
American tax payer money cannot Constitutionally fund religious propaganda of any sort. I suspect Iowa's State Constitution would have similarly explicit support for the separation of religion and state.
http://www.arlinc.org/ -- Americans for Religious Liberty
The objection is not to a positive program among folks caught up in America's prison industry. Rather, objection is made to tax monies being used to fund religious propaganda.
The Nation of Islam is successful at reducing recidivism and ending the cycle of crime that returns young black men to prison. Should any state or federal government establish the NoI as a tax payer funded ministry to convert prisoners held by the state?
Our Consitution offers a studied and reasoned neutrality on religious establishments.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.